Terrorism: First Impressions 3

Terrorism CHAPTER 1 First Impressions

OPENING VIEWPOINT: THE IDEOLOGY OF AL-QA’IDA

Prior to his death in May 2011, Osama bin Laden established of evil. Western and Muslim nations that do not share Al-Qa’ida as an international network that came to symbolize Al-Qa’ida’s vision of true Islam are enemies. the globalization of terrorism in the 21st century. The network is • Violence in a defensivedistribute war on behalf of Islam is the perceived by many to represent a quintessential model for small only course of action. There cannot be peace with the groups of like-minded revolutionaries who wish to wage transna- West. tional insurgencies against strong adversaries. Although Al-Qa’ida • Becauseor this is a just war, many of the theological and certainly exists as a loose network of relatively independent legal restrictions on the use of force by Muslims do not cells, it has also evolved into an idea—an ideology and a fighting apply. strategy—that has been embraced by sympathetic revolutionar- • Because U.S. and Western power is based on their ies throughout the world. What is the ideology of Al-Qa’ida? Why economies, mounting large-scale mass casualty attacks did a network of religious revolutionaries evolve into a potent post,that focus on economic targets is a primary goal. symbol of global resistance against its enemies? Which underlying • Islamic governments that cooperate with the West and commonalities appeal to motivated Islamist activists? do not adopt strict Islamic law are apostasies and must Al-Qa’ida leaders such as the late bin Laden and his succes- be violently overthrown. sor as leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, consistently released public • Israel is an illegitimate nation and must be destroyed. pronouncements of their goals, often by delivering audio and video communiqués to international newscopy, agencies such as Al These principles have become a rallying ideology for Islamist Jazeera in Qatar. They also became quite adept at using Internet extremists who have few, if any, ties to Al-Qa’ida. Thus, the outlets and social networking technologies as communications war on terrorism is not solely a conflict against established resources. Based on these communiqués, the following prin- organizations but is also a conflict against an entrenched belief ciples frame the ideology ofnot Al-Qa’ida:a system. • The struggle is a clash of civilizations. Holy war is a reli- Note gious Doduty and necessary for the salvation of one’s soul a. Adapted from U.S. Department of State, Bureau of and the defense of the Muslim nation. Counterterrorism and Countering Violent Extremism. Country • Only two sides exist, and there is no middle ground in Reports on Terrorism 2016. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of this apocalyptic conflict between Islam and the forces State, 2017.

2 Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. Chapter 1 Terrorism: First Impressions 3

errorism has been a dark feature of human behavior since the dawn of recorded history. Great leaders have been assassinated, groups and individuals have committed acts of incredible violence, and entire cities and nations have been put to the sword—all in the name of defending T a greater good. Terrorism, however defined, has always challenged the stability of societies and the peace of mind of everyday people. In the modern era, the impact of terrorism—that is, its ability to terrorize—is not limited to the specific locales or regions where the terrorists strike. In the age of television, the Internet, satellite communications, and global news coverage, graphic images of terrorist incidents are broadcast instantaneously into the homes of hundreds of millions of people. Terrorist groups understand the power of these images, and they manipulate them to their advantage as much as they can. Terrorist states also fully appreciate the power of instantaneous information, so they try to control the “spin” on reports of their behavior. In many respects, the 21st century is an era of globalized terrorism. Some acts of political violence are clearly acts of terrorism. Most people would agree that politically motivated planting of bombs in marketplaces, massacres of enemy civilians, and the routine use of torture by governments are terrorist acts. As we begin our study of terrorism, we will encounter many definitional gray areas. Depending on which side of the ideological, racial, religious, or national fence one sits on, political violence can be interpreted either as an act of unmitigated terrorist barbar- ity or as freedom fighting and national liberation. These gray areas will be explored in the chapters that follow. September 11, 2001: The Dawn of a New Era. The death of Al-Qa’idadistribute leader Osama bin Laden in May 2011 occurred prior to the 10th commemoration of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the U.S. homeland. The attacks were seen by many as a turning point in the history of political violence. In the aftermath of these attacks, journalists,or scholars, and national leaders repeatedly described the emergence of a new international terrorist environment. It was argued that within this new environment, terrorists were now quite capable of using— and very willing to use—weapons of mass destruction to inflict unprec- U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation edented casualties and destruction on enemy targets. Terrorist movements also became quite adept at using social networking technologies and the Internet to recruit and inspire individuals to carrypost, out mass-casualty attacks against “soft” civilian targets. These attacks seemed to confirm warnings from experts during the 1990s that a New Terrorism,1 using “asymmetrical” methods, would characterize the terrorist environment in the new millennium.2 (Asymmetrical warfare is discussed further in Chap- ters 8 and 10.) Several questions about this newcopy, environment have arisen: •• How has the new terrorist environment affected traditional terrorist profiles? •• How has traditionalnot terrorism been affected by the collapse of revolutionary Marxism? •• What is the likely impact of “stateless” international terrorism? ReadersDo will notice that these questions focus on terrorist groups and movements. However, it is very important to understand that terrorist states were responsible for untold millions of deaths during the 20th century. In Photo 1.1 Osama bin Laden. From addition, genocidal fighting between communal groups claimed the lives the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation of many millions more. Our exploration of terrorism, therefore, requires us most-wanted terrorists website. Bin to consider every facet of political violence, from low-intensity campaigns Laden was killed during a raid by a U.S. by terrorist gangs to high-intensity campaigns by terrorist governments and naval special forces unit in Abbottabad, genocidal paramilitaries. Pakistan, on May 2, 2011.

Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. 4 Part I Terrorism: A Conceptual Review

This chapter is a general introduction to the subject of terrorism. It is an overview—a first glance—of basic concepts that will be developed in later discussions. The following themes are introduced here and will be explored in much greater detail in subsequent chapters:

•• First Considerations •• Conceptual Considerations: Understanding Political Violence •• The Past as Prologue: Historical Perspectives on Terrorism •• Terrorism and Criminal Skill: Three Cases From the Modern Era

First Considerations At the outset, readers must develop a basic understanding of several issues underlying the study of terrorism. These issues are ongoing topics of research and debate among scholars, government officials, the media, and social activists, and all of them will be explored in detail in later chapters. The discussion here introduces the following:

•• An Overview of Extremism and Terrorism •• Terrorism at First Glance •• Sources of Extremism and Terrorism distribute An Overview of Extremism and Terrorism or Extremism is a quality that is “radical in opinion, especially in political matters; ultra; advanced.”3 It is characterized by intolerance toward opposing interests and divergent opinions, and it is the primary catalyst and motivation for terrorist behavior. Extremists who cross the line to become terrorists always develop noble arguments to rationalize and justify acts of violence directed against enemy nations, people, religions, or other interests. Extremism is a radical expression of one’s political values. Both the content of one’s beliefs and the style in which one expresses those beliefspost, are basic elements for defining extremism. Laird Wilcox summed up this quality as follows:

Extremism is more an issue of style than of content. . . . Most people can hold radical or unorthodox views and still entertain them in a more or less reasonable, rational, and non- dogmatic manner. On the other hand, I have met people whose views are fairly close to the political mainstreamcopy, but were presented in a shrill, uncompromising, bullying, and distinctly authoritarian manner.4

Thus, a fundamental definitional issue for extremism is how one expresses an idea, in addition to the questionnot of which belief one acts upon. Both elements—style and content—are important for our investigation of fringe beliefs and terrorist behavior. Extremism is a precursor to terrorism—it is an overarching belief system terrorists use to justify their violent behavior. Extremism is characterized by what a person’s beliefs are as well as how a Doperson expresses his or her beliefs. Thus, no matter how offensive or reprehensible one’s thoughts or words are, they are not by themselves acts of terrorism. Only those who violently act out their extremist beliefs are terrorists. Terrorism would not, from a layperson’s point of view, seem to be a difficult concept to define. Most people likely hold an instinctive understanding that terrorism is

•• politically motivated violence, •• usually directed against soft targets (i.e., civilian and administrative government targets), and •• with an intention to affect (terrorize) a target audience.

This instinctive understanding would also hold that terrorism is a criminal, unfair, or otherwise illegitimate use of force. Laypersons might presume that this is an easily understood concept, but defining terrorism is not such a simple process. Experts have for some time grappled with designing (and agreeing on) clear definitions of terrorism; the issue has, in fact, been at the center of an ongoing debate. The result of this debate is a remarkable variety of approaches and definitions. Walter Laqueur noted that “more than a hundred definitions have been offered,” including several of his own.5 Even within the U.S. government, different agencies apply several definitions. These definitional problems are explored further in the next chapter.

Terrorism at First Glance Spencer Platt/Getty Images News/Getty The modern era of terrorism is primarily (though not exclu- sively) a conflict between adversaries who on one side are waging a self-described war on terrorism and on the other side are waging a self-described holy war in defense of their religion. It is an active confrontation, as evidenced by the fact that the incidence of significant terrorist attacks often spikes to serious levels. For example, the number of terrorist incidents worldwide has annually been documented as consistently robust, as reported by the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Counterterrorism and Countering Violent Extremism:6 distribute

•• 11,023 in 2005 •• 14,443 in 2006 or •• 14,415 in 2007 •• 11,663 in 2008 •• 10,968 in 2009 •• 11,641 in 2010 •• 10,283 in 2011 post, •• 6,771 in 2012 •• 9,707 in 2013 Photo 1.2 Hijacked United Airlines Flight 175 from •• 13,463 in 2014 Boston crashes into the south tower of the World Trade Center and explodes at 9:03 a.m. on September 11, 2001, •• 11,774 in 2015 in New York City. •• 11,072 in 2016 copy,

Although such trends are disturbing, it is critical for one to keep these facts in perspective because the modern terrorist environment is in no manner a unique circumstance in human history. It will become clearnot in the following pages that the history of terrorist behavior extends into antiquity and that common themes and concepts span the ages. State terrorism, dissident terrorism, and other types of political violence are found in all periods of human civilization. It will also become clear to readers that many common justifications—rooted in basic beliefs—have been used to rationalize terroristDo violence throughout history. For example, the following concepts hold true regardless of the contexts of history, culture, or region:

•• Those who practice revolutionary violence and state repression always claim to champion noble causes and values. •• Policies that advocate extreme violence always cite righteous goals to justify their behavior, such as the need to defend a religious faith or defend the human rights of a people. •• The perpetrators of violent acts uniformly maintain that they are freedom fighters (in the case of revolutionaries) or the champions of law and social order (in the case of governments).

Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. 6 Part I Terrorism: A Conceptual Review Sources of Extremism and Terrorism The underlying causes of terrorism have also been the subject of extensive discussion, debate, and research. This is perhaps because the study of the sources of terrorism spans many disciplines—including sociology, psychology, criminology, and political science. The causes of terrorism will be explored in detail in Chapter 3. For now, a general model will serve as a starting point for developing our understanding of which factors lead to terrorist violence. To begin, we must understand that “political violence, including terrorism, has systemic origins that can be ameliorated. Social and economic pressures, frustrated political aspirations, and in a more proxi- mate sense, the personal experiences of terrorists and their relations, all contribute to the terrorist reservoir.”7 Nehemia Friedland designed “a convenient framework for the analysis of the antecedents of political terrorism,” outlined as follows: “First, terrorism is a group phenomenon . . . perpetrated by organized groups whose members have a clear group identity—national, religious or ideological. . . . Second, political terrorism has its roots in intergroup conflict. . . . Third, ‘insurgent terrorism,’ unlike ‘state terrorism,’ . . . is a ‘strategy of the weak.’”8 One should appreciate that these issues continue to be a source of intensive debate. Nevertheless, working definitions have been adopted as a matter of logical necessity. Let us presume for now that terrorist acts are grounded in extremist beliefs that arise from group identity, intergroup conflict, and a chosen strategy.9 distribute Conceptual Considerations: or Understanding Political Violence The term terrorism has acquired a decidedly pejorative meaning in the modern era, so that few if any states or groups who espouse political violence ever refer to themselves as terrorists. Nevertheless, these same states and groups can be unabashedly extremist in their beliefs or violent in their behavior. They often invoke—and manipulate—imagespost, of a malevolent threat or unjust conditions to justify their actions. The question is whether these justifications are morally satisfactory (and thereby validate extremist violence) or whether terrorism is inherently wrong.

The Significance of Symbolism Symbolism is a centralcopy, feature of terrorism. Most terrorist targets at some level symbolize the righteousness of the terrorists’ cause and the evil of the opponent they are fighting. Symbolism can be used to rationalize acts of extreme violence and can be manipulated to fit any number of targets into the category of an enemy interest. Terrorists are also very mindful of their image and skillfullynot conduct public relations and propaganda campaigns to “package” themselves. Modern terrorists and their supporters have become quite adept at crafting symbolic meaning from acts of violence. Symbolism can create abstract ideological linkages between terrorists and their victims. This Doprocess was seen during the wave of kidnappings by Latin American leftists during the 1970s, when terrorists seized civilian business executives and diplomats who the kidnappers said sym- bolized capitalism and exploitation. Symbolic targets can also represent enemy social or political establishments, as in the Irish Republican Army’s (IRA’s) assassination of Lord Louis Mountbatten (the uncle of Prince Philip Mountbatten, husband of Queen Elizabeth II) in 1979 and the IRA’s attempted assassination of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in 1984. In some cases, entire groups of people can be symbolically labeled and slaughtered, as during the genocides of the Nazi Holocaust (pseudo-racial), in the killing fields of Cambodia (social and political), in Rwanda (ethnic and social), and in the Darfur region of Sudan (racial).

Political Violence: Mala Prohibita or Mala in Se? It is helpful to use two concepts from the field of criminal justice administration. In criminal law, the terms mala prohibita and mala in se10 are applied to behaviors that society defines as deviant acts. They represent concepts that are very useful for the study of terrorism.

•• Mala prohibita acts are “crimes that are made illegal by legislation.”11 These acts are illegal because society has declared them to be wrong; they are not inherently immoral, wicked, or evil. Examples include laws prohibiting gambling and prostitution, which are considered to be moral prohibitions against socially unacceptable behaviors rather than prohibitions of fundamental evils. •• Mala in se acts are crimes “that are immoral or wrong in themselves.”12 These acts cannot be justified in civilized society, and they have no acceptable qualities. For example, premeditated murder and rape are mala in se crimes. They will never be legalized.

Are terrorist methods fundamentally evil? Perhaps so, because terrorism commonly evokes images of maximum violence against innocent victims carried out in the name of a higher cause. However, is terrorist violence always such a bad thing? Are not some causes worth fighting for? Killing for? Dying for? Is not terrorism simply a matter of one’s point of view? Most would agree that basic values such as freedom and liberty are indeed worth fighting for, U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation and sometimes killing or dying for. If so, perhaps “where you stand depends on where you sit.” Thus, if distribute the bombs are falling on your head, is it not an act of terrorism? If the bombs are falling on an enemy’s head in the name of your freedom, how can it possibly be or terrorism? Conceptually, right and wrong behaviors are not always relative considerations, for many actions are indeed mala in se. However, this is not an easy analysis because violence committed by genuinely oppressed people can arguably raise questions ofpost, mala prohibita as a matter of perspective.

The Just War Doctrine The just war doctrine is an ideal and a moralistic philosophy. The concept is oftencopy, used by ideologi - cal and religious extremists to justify acts of extreme violence. Throughout history, nations and individuals have gone to war with the belief that their cause was just and their opponents’not cause unjust. Similarly, attempts have been made for millennia to write fair and just laws of war and rules of engagement. For example, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Hague ConventionsDo produced at least 21 international agreements on the rules of war.13 This is a moral and ethical issue that raises the questions of whether one can ethically attack an Photo 1.3 Fazul Abdullah Mohammed. Photographs from the opponent, how one can justifiably defend one- U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation most-wanted terrorists website. self with force, and what types of force are morally Mohammed was killed at a checkpoint in Somalia on June 8, 2011. acceptable in either context. The just war debate also He was believed to be the mastermind behind the 1998 bombings of asks who can morally be defined as an enemy and the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, what kinds of targets it is morally acceptable to attack. that resulted in more than 200 deaths and thousands of injuries.

Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. 8 Part I Terrorism: A Conceptual Review

In this regard, there are two separate components to the concept of just war (which philosophers call the “just war tradition”): the rationale for initiating the war (a war’s ends) and the method of warfare (a war’s means). Criteria for whether a war is just are divided into jus ad bellum (justice of war) and jus in bello (justice in war) criteria.14 Thus, jus in bello is correct behavior while waging war, and jus ad bellum is having the correct conditions for waging war in the first place. These concepts have been debated by philosophers and theologians for centuries. The early Christian philosopher Saint Augustine concluded in the 5th century that war is justified to punish injuries inflicted by a nation that has refused to correct wrongs committed by its citizens. The Christian religious tradition, especially that of the Roman Catholic Church, has devoted a great deal of intellectual effort to clarifying Augustine’s concept. Augustine was, of course, referring to warfare between nations and cities, and Church doctrine long held that an attack against state authority was an offense against God.15 Likewise, The Hague Conventions dealt only with rules of conflict between nations and afforded no legal rights to spies or antistate rebels. Neither system referred to rules of engagement for nonstate or antistate conflicts. In the modern era, both dissidents and states have adapted the just war tradition to their political environments. Antistate conflict and reprisals by states are commonplace. Dissidents always consider their cause just and their methods proportional to the force used by the agents of their oppressors. They are, in their own minds, freedom fighters waging a just war. As one Hamas fighter said, “Before I start shooting, I start to concentrate on reading verses of the Koran because the Koran gives me the courage to fight the Israelis.”16 Antiterrorist reprisals launched by states are also justified as appropriatedistribute and proportional applica - tions of force—in this case, as a means to root out bands of terrorists. For example, after three suicide bombers killed or wounded scores of people in Jerusalem and Haifa in December 2001, Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon justified Israeli reprisals by saying, “A orwar of terrorism was forced on us [by the terrorists]. . . . If you ask what the aim of this war is, I will tell you. It is the aim of the terrorists . . . to exile us from here. . . . This will not happen.”17 From the perspective of terrorism and counterterrorism, both dissident and state applications of force are legitimate subjects of just war scrutiny, especially because dissidents usually attack soft civilian targets and state reprisals are usually not directed against standing armies. The following “moral checklist” was published in the Americanpost, newspaper The Christian Science Monitor during the first phase of the war on terrorism begun after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks:

•• Is it justified to attack states and overturn regimes to get at terrorists? •• Can the U.S. legitimately target political figures like Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar? •• What are U.S. obligations in terms of minimizing civilian casualties? •• What type of forcecopy, should be used? •• When should U.S. forces take prisoners, rather than killing Afghan troops? •• Is there a plan for peace?18

Thesenot questions are generically applicable to all state antiterrorist campaigns as well as to antistate dissident violence. Rules of war and the just war tradition are the result of many motivations. Some rules and justifications are self-serving, others are pragmatic, and still others are grounded in ethnonationalist or religious traditions. Hence, the just war concept can easily be adapted to justify Doethnic, racial, national, and religious extremism in the modern era.

The Past as Prologue: Historical Perspectives on Terrorism It is perhaps natural for each generation to view history narrowly, from within its own political context. Contemporary commentators and laypersons tend to interpret modern events as though

Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. Chapter 1 Terrorism: First Impressions 9 they have no historical precedent. However, terrorism is by no means a modern phenomenon; in fact, it has a long history. Nor does terrorism arise in a political vacuum. Let us consider a brief summary of several historical periods to illustrate the global and timeless sweep of terrorist behavior.

Antiquity In the ancient world, cases and stories of state repression and political violence were common. Several ancient writers championed tyrannicide (the killing of tyrants) as for the greater good of the citizenry and to delight the gods. Some assassins were honored by the public. For example, when the tyrant Hipparchus was assassinated by Aristogeiton and Harmodius, statues were erected to honor them after their executions.19 Conquerors often set harsh examples by exterminating entire populations or forcing the conquered into exile. An example of this practice is the Babylonian Exile, which followed the conquest of the kingdom of Judea. Babylon’s victory resulted in the forced removal of the Judean population to Babylon in 598 and 587 bce. Those in authority also repressed the expression of ideas from individuals whom they deemed dangerous, sometimes violently. In ancient Greece, Athenian authorities sentenced the great philosopher Socrates to death in 399 bce for allegedly corrupting the city-state’s youth and meddling in religious affairs. He drank hemlock and died among his students and followers. distribute The Roman Age During the time of the Roman Empire, the political world was rife withor many violent demonstrations of power, which were arguably examples of what we would now call state terrorism or genocide. These include the brutal suppression of Spartacus’s followers after the Servile War of 73–71 bce, after which the Romans crucified surviving rebels along the Appian Way’s route to Rome. Crucifixion was used as a form of public execution by Rome for offenses committed against Roman authority and involved affixing condemned persons to a cross or other wooden platform. The condemned were either nailed through the wristpost, or hand or tied on the platform; they died by suffocation as their bodies sagged. Crucifixion was considered to be a shameful death and was generally reserved for slaves and rebels, so Roman citizens were usually exempted from execution by crucifixion. Warfare was waged in an equally hard manner, as evidenced by the final conquest of the North African city-state of Carthage in 146 bce. The city was reportedly allowed to burn for 10 days, the rubble was cursed, and salt was symbolically ploughed into the soil to signify that Carthage would forever remain desolate. During anothercopy, successful campaign in 106 ce, the Dacian nation (modern Romania) was eliminated, its population was enslaved, and many Dacians perished in gladiatorial games. In other conquered territories, conquest was often accompanied by similar demonstrations of terror, always with the intent to demonstrate that Roman rule would be imposed without mercy against those who didnot not submit to the authority of the empire. Regicide (the killing of kings) was also common during the Roman age. Perhaps the best- known political incident in ancient Rome was the assassination of Julius Caesar in 44 bce by rivals in the Senate. Other Roman emperors also met violent fates: Caligula and Galba were killed by the PraetorianDo Guard in 41 and 68 ce, respectively; Domitian was stabbed to death in 96 ce; a paid gladia- tor murdered Commodus in 193 ce; and Caracalla, Elagabalus, and many other emperors either were assassinated or died suspiciously.20

The Ancient and Medieval Middle East Cases exist of movements in the ancient and medieval Middle East that used what modern analysts would consider to be terrorist tactics. For example, in History of the Jewish War—a seven-volume

Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. 10 Part I Terrorism: A Conceptual Review

account of the first Jewish rebellion against Roman occupation (66–73 ce)—the historian Flavius Josephus describes how one faction of the rebels, the sicarii (named after their preferred use of sica, or short, curved daggers), attacked both Romans and members of the Jewish establishment.21 They were masters of guerrilla warfare and the destruction of symbolic property, and they belonged to a group known as the Zealots (from the Greek zelos, meaning ardor or strong spirit), who opposed the Roman occupation of Palestine. The modern term zealot, used to describe uncompromising devotion to radical change, is derived from the name of this group. Assassination was a commonly used tactic. Some sicarii zealots were present at the siege of Masada, a hilltop fortress that held out against the Romans for 3 years before the defenders committed suicide in 74 ce rather than surrender. Another important historical case, the Assassins in 13th-century Persia, is discussed in Chapter 6. Both the Zealots and Assassins are important historical examples because they continue to inform modern analyses of terrorist violence and motives.

The Dark Ages: Prelude to Modern Terrorism During the period from the Assassins (13th century) to the French Revolution (18th century), behavior that would later be considered terrorism was commonly practiced in medieval warfare. In fact, a great deal of medieval conflict involved openly brutal warfare. However, the modern terrorist profile of politically motivated dissidents attempting to change an existing order, or state repression to preserve state hegemony, was uncommon. Nation-states in the moderndistribute sense did not exist in medi - eval Europe, and recurrent warfare was motivated by religious intolerance and political discord between feudal kings and lords. The post-Assassin Middle East also witnessed periodic invasions, discord between leaders, and religious warfare, but not modern-styleor terrorism. It was not until the rise of the modern nation-state in the mid–17th century that the range of intensity of conflict devolved from open warfare to include behavior the modern era would define as insurgency, guerrilla warfare, and terrorism.

The French Revolution post, During the French Revolution, the word terrorism was coined in its modern context by British states- man and philosopher Edmund Burke. He used the word to describe the régime de la terreur, commonly known in English as the Reign of Terror (June 1793 to July 1794).22 The Reign of Terror, led by the radical Jacobin-dominated government, is a good example of state terrorism carried out to further the goals of a revolutionary ideology.23 During the Terror, thousands of opponents to the Jacobin dictatorship—and otherscopy, merely perceived to be enemies of the new revolutionary Republic— were arrested and put on trial before a Revolutionary Tribunal. Those found to be enemies of the Republic were beheaded by a new instrument of execution—the guillotine. The guillotine had the capability to execute victims one after the other in assembly-line fashion and was regarded by Jacobinsnot and other revolutionaries at the time as an enlightened and civilized tool of revolutionary justice because it provided a quick death.24 The ferocity of the Reign of Terror is reflected in the number of victims: Between 17,000 and 40,000 persons were executed, and perhaps 200,000 political prisoners died in prisons from disease Doand starvation. 25 Two incidents illustrate the communal nature of this violence: In Lyon, 700 people were massacred by cannon fire in the town square, and in Nantes, thousands were drowned in the Loire River when the boats in which they were detained were sunk.26 The Revolutionary Tribunal is a symbol of revolutionary justice and state terrorism that has its modern counterparts in 20th-century social upheavals. Recent examples include the “struggle meetings” in revolutionary China (public criticism sessions, involving public humiliation and con- fession) and the komiteh (ad hoc “people’s committee”) of revolutionary Iran.27

Chapter Perspective 1.1

The Gunpowder Plot of Guy Fawkes

The reign of James I, King of England from 1603 to 1625, meticulously smuggled gunpowder into the Palace of took place in the aftermath of a religious upheaval. During Westminster, intending to blow it up along with King James the previous century, King Henry VIII (1509–1547) wrested and any other officials in attendance on the opening day of from Parliament the authority to proclaim himself the head Parliament. Unfortunately for Fawkes, one of his fellow plot- of religious affairs in England. King Henry had requested ters attempted to send a note to warn his brother-in-law to permission from Pope Clement VII to annul his marriage stay away from Westminster on the appointed day. The note to Catherine of Aragon when she failed to give birth to was intercepted, and Fawkes was captured on November 5, a male heir to the throne. His intention was then to marry 1605, while guarding the store of gunpowder. Anne Boleyn. When the pope refused his request, Henry Guy Fawkes suffered the English penalty for treason. He proclaimed the Church of England and separated the new was dragged through the streets, he was hanged until nearly church from papal authority. The English crown confiscated dead, his bowels were drawn from him, and he was cut into Catholic Church property and shut down Catholic monaster- quarters—an infamous process known as hanging, draw- ies. English Catholics who failed to swear allegiance to the ing, and quartering. Fawkes had known that this would be crown as supreme head of the church were repressed by his fate, so when the noose was placed around his neck he Henry and later by Queen Elizabeth I (1558–1603). took a running leap, hopingdistribute to break his neck. Unfortunately, When James I was proclaimed king, Guy Fawkes the rope broke, and the executioner proceeded with the full and other conspirators plotted to assassinate him. They ordeal. or

Nineteenth-Century Europe: Two Examples From the Left Modern, left-wing terrorism is not a product of the 20thpost, century. Its ideological ancestry dates to the 19th century, when anarchist and communist philosophers began to advocate the destruction of capitalist and imperial society—what Karl Marx referred to as the “spectre . . . haunting Europe.”28 Some revolutionaries readily encouraged the use of terrorism in the new cause. One theorist, Karl Heinzen in Germany, anticipated the late–20th century fear that terrorists might obtain weapons of mass destruction when he supported the acquisition of new weapons technologies to utterly destroy the enemies of the people. According to Heinzen, these weapons could include poison gas and new, high-yield explosives.29 copy, During the 19th century, several terrorist movements championed the rights of the lower classes. These movements were prototypes for 20th-century groups and grew out of social and political environments that were unique to their countries. To illustrate this point, the following two cases are drawnnot from early industrial England and the semifeudal Russian context of the late 19th century. The Luddites were English workers in the early 1800s who objected to the social and economic transformations of the Industrial Revolution. Their principal objection was that industrializa- tion threatenedDo their jobs, so they targeted the machinery of the new textile factories. Textile mills and weaving machinery were disrupted and sabotaged. For example, they attacked stocking looms that mass-produced stockings at the expense of skilled stocking weavers who made them by hand. A mythical figure, Ned Ludd, was the supposed founder of the Luddite movement. The movement was active from 1811 to 1816 and was responsible for sabotaging and destroying wool and cotton mills. The British government eventually suppressed the movement by passing anti-Luddite laws, including establishing the crime of “machine breaking,” which was punishable by death. After 17

Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. 12 Part I Terrorism: A Conceptual Review

Luddites were executed in 1813, the movement gradually faded out. Although historians debate whether Luddites clearly fit the profile of terrorists, modern antitechnology activists and terrorists, such as the Unabomber in the United States, are sometimes referred to as neo-Luddites. People’s Will (Narodnaya Volya) in Russia was a direct outgrowth of student dissatisfaction with the czarist regime in the late 19th century. Many young Russian university students, some of whom had studied abroad, became imbued with the ideals of anarchism and Marxism. Many of these students became radical reformists who

DEA / A. DAGLI ORTI/De Agostini/Getty Images DEA / A. DAGLI ORTI/De championed the rights of the people, particularly the peasant class. A populist revolutionary society, Land and Liberty (Zemlya Volya), was founded in 1876 with the goal of fomenting a mass peasant uprising by settling radical students among them to raise their class consciousness. After a series of arrests and mass public trials, Land and Liberty split into two factions in 1879. One faction, Black Repartition, kept to the goal of a peasant revolution. The other faction, People’s Will, fashioned itself into a conspira- torial terrorist organization.distribute People’s Will members believed that they understood the underlying problems of Russia better than the uneducated masses of people did,or and they concluded that they were therefore better able to force government change. This was, Photo 1.4 U.S. president William McKinley is shot in fact, one of the first examples of a revolutionary vanguard on September 6, 1901 by anarchist Leon Czolgosz, who strategy. They believed that they could both demoralize hid his gun in a handkerchief and fired as the president the czarist government and expose its weaknesses to the approached to shake his hand. McKinley died 8 days later. peasantry. People’s Will quickly embarked on a terrorist campaignpost, against carefully selected targets. Incidents of terror committed by People’s Will members—and other revolutionaries who emulated them—included shootings, knifings, and bombings against government officials. In one successful attack, Czar Alexander II was assassinated by a terrorist bomb on March 1, 1881. The immediate outcome of the terrorist campaign was the installation of a repressive police state in Russia that, although not as effi- cient as later police states would be in the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, succeeded in harassing and imprisoning most memberscopy, of People’s Will. The Modern Era and the War on Terrorism It is clearnot from human history that terrorism is deeply woven into the fabric of social and political conflict. This quality has not changed, and in the modern world, states and targeted populations are challenged by the New Terrorism, which is characterized by the following: Do•• loose cell–based networks, which by design have minimal lines of command and control •• desired acquisition of high-intensity weapons and weapons of mass destruction •• politically vague, religious, or mystical motivations •• asymmetrical methods that maximize casualties •• skillful use of the Internet and social networking media, and manipulation of the mass media

The New Terrorism should be contrasted with traditional terrorism, which is typically characterized by the following:

•• clearly identifiable organizations or movements •• use of conventional weapons, usually small arms and explosives •• explicit grievances championing specific classes or ethnonational groups •• relatively “surgical” selection of targets

New information technologies and the Internet create unprecedented opportunities for terrorist groups, and violent extremists have become adept at bringing their wars into the homes of literally hundreds of millions of people. Those who specialize in suicide bombings, vehicular bombings, or mass- casualty attacks correctly calculate that carefully selected targets will attract the attention of a global audience. Thus, cycles of violence not only disrupt normal routines; they also produce long periods of global awareness. Such cycles can be devastating. For example, during the winter and spring of 2005, Iraqi suicide bombings increased markedly in intensity and frequency, from 69 in April 2005 (a record rate at that time) to 90 in May.30 Likewise, the renewal of sectarian violence in 2014, exacerbated by intensive combat with ISIS, was a reinvigoration of the sectarian bloodletting that occurred during the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq in the early 2000s.31 These attacks resulted in many casualties, including hundreds of deaths, and greatly outpaced the previous cycle of car bombings by more than two to one. All of these threats offer new challenges for policy makers about how to respond to the behavior of terrorist states, groups, and individuals. The war on terrorism, launched in the aftermath of the attacks of September 11, 2001, seemed to herald a new resolve to end terrorism. This has proven to be a difficult task. The war has been fought on many levels, as exemplified by the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and the disruption of terrorist cells on several continents. Theredistribute have been many serious terrorist strikes such as those in Madrid, Spain; Bali, Indonesia; London, England; Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt; Paris, France; Brussels, Belgium; and Orlando, United States.or In addition, differences arose within the post–September 11 alliance, creating significant strains. It is clear that the war will be a long-term prospect, likely with many unanticipated events. Table 1.1 reports the scale of terrorist violence in 2015 for 10 countries with active terrorist environments.

Table 1.1 Ten Countries With the Most Terroristpost, Attacks, 2015

Deaths per Injured per Total Kidnapped/ Total Attacks Total Deaths* Attack* Total Injured* Attack* Hostages 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 Iraq 2,418 3,370 6,932 9,926 2.99 3.07 11,856 15,137 5.23 4.79 3,982 2,658 Afghanistan 1,708 1,594 copy, 5,292 4,507 3.24 2.91 6,246 4,700 4.00 3.15 1,112 719 Pakistan 1,009 1,823 1,081 1,761 1.10 0.99 1,325 2,836 1.36 1.61 269 879 India 791 764 289 418 0.38 0.57 508 639 0.68 0.89 862 305 Nigeria 589not 663 4,886 7,531 9.29 12.81 2,777 2,251 7.67 6.31 1,341 1,298 Egypt 494 292 656 184 1.34 0.63 844 452 1.73 1.55 24 29 Philippines 485 378 258 240 0.54 0.65 548 367 1.16 1.00 119 145 BangladeshDo 459 124 75 30 0.16 0.24 691 107 1.52 0.87 4 7 Libya 428 554 462 435 1.24 0.90 657 567 1.85 1.21 764 336 Syria 382 232 2,748 1,698 7.99 8.24 2,818 1,473 9.78 9.32 1,453 872 Worldwide 11,774 13,482 28,328 32,763 2.53 2.57 35,320 34785 3.30 2.86 12,189 9,461

Source: U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Counterterrorism and Countering Violent Extremism. Country Reports on Terrorism 2015. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of State, 2016. *Includes perpetrators.

Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. 14 Part I Terrorism: A Conceptual Review Terrorism and Criminal Skill: Three Cases From the Modern Era Terrorism is condemned internationally as an illegal use of force and an illegitimate expression of political will. Applying this concept of illegality, one can argue that terrorists are criminals and that terrorist attacks require some degree of criminal skill. For example, the radical Islamist network Al-Qa’ida set up an elaborate financial system to sustain its activities. This financial system included secret bank accounts, front companies, offshore bank accounts, and charities.32 Al-Qa’ida is an example of a stateless movement that became a self-sustaining revolutionary network. It is also an example of a sophisticated transnational criminal enterprise. Terrorist attacks involve different degrees of criminal skill. The following cases are examples of the wide range of sophistication found in incidents of political violence. All three cases are short illustrations of the criminal skill of the following individual extremists:

•• Anders Breivik, a Norwegian right-wing extremist who detonated a lethal bomb in Oslo and went on a killing spree at a youth camp in July 2011 •• Ted Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber, who was famous for sending mail bombs to his victims and who eluded capture for 18 years, from 1978 to 1996 •• Ramzi Yousef, an international terrorist who was the mastermind behind the first World Trade Center bombing, in February 1993 distribute

Case 1: Anders Breivik or Many terrorist incidents are the acts of individual extremists who simply embark on killing sprees, using a relatively low degree of criminal sophistication. For example, domestic “lone-wolf” attacks in Europe and the United States have usually been ideological or racially motivated killing sprees committed by individual extremists who are often neo-fascists, neo-Nazis, or racial supremacists.33 One of these attacks occurred on July 22, 2011, in and around Oslo, Norway, when a right-wing extremist murdered nearly 80 people. post, Anders Breivik, a self-professed right-wing ideologue, detonated a car bomb in the government district of Oslo and methodically shot to death dozens of victims at a Norwegian Labor Party youth summer camp on the island of Utøya. His victims were government workers, bystanders, and teenage residents of the camp. The sequence of Breivik’s assault occurred as follows: copy, •• Breivik detonated a car bomb in Oslo’s government district using ammonium nitrate and fuel oil (ANFO) explosives. The blast killed eight people and wounded at least a dozen more. •• He next drove nearly 2 hours to a youth summer camp on the island of Utøya. The camp was sponsorednot by the youth organization of the ruling Norwegian Labor Party, and hundreds of youths were in attendance. Breivik was disguised as a policeman. •• When Breivik arrived on the island, he announced that he was a police officer who was following up on the bombing in Oslo. As people gathered around him, he drew his weapons and Do began shooting. •• Using a carbine and semiautomatic handgun, Breivik methodically shot scores of attendees on Utøya, most of them teenagers. The attack lasted approximately 90 minutes and ended when police landed on the island and accepted Breivik’s surrender.

In August 2012, Breivik was convicted of murdering 77 people and received Norway’s maximum sentence of 21 years’ imprisonment. Under Norwegian law, his incarceration may be extended indefi- nitely if he is deemed to be a risk to society.

The Breivik case illustrates how the lone-wolf scenario involves an individual who believes in a certain ideology but who is not acting on behalf of an organized group. These individuals tend to exhibit a relatively low degree of criminal skill while carrying out their assault.

Case 2: Theodore “Ted” Kaczynski Using a medium degree of criminal sophistication, many terrorists have been able to remain active for long periods of time without being captured by security agents. Some enter into “retirement” during this time, whereas others remain at least sporadically active. An example of the latter profile is Theodore “Ted” Kaczynski, popularly known as the Unabomber. The term Unabomber was derived from the FBI’s designation of his case as UNABOM during its investigation of his activities. In May 1978, Kaczynski began constructing and detonating a series of bombs directed against corporations and universities. His usual practice was to send the devices through the mail disguised as business parcels. Examples of his attacks include the following:

•• A bomb caught fire inside a mail bag aboard a Boeing 727. It had been rigged with a barometric trigger to explode at a certain altitude. •• A package bomb exploded inside the home of the president of United Airlines, injuring him. •• A letter bomb exploded at Vanderbilt University, injuring a secretary. It had been addressed to the chair of the computer science department. distribute •• A University of California, Berkeley, professor was severely injured when a pipe bomb he found in the faculty room exploded. •• Two University of Michigan scholars were injured when a packageor bomb exploded at a professor’s home. The bomb had been designed to look like a book manuscript. •• An antipersonnel bomb exploded in the parking lot behind a computer rental store, killing the store’s owner.

During an 18-year period, Ted Kaczynski was responsible for the detonation of more than 15 bombs around the country, killing three people and post,injuring 22 more (some very seriously). He was arrested in his Montana cabin in April 1996. Kaczynski was sentenced in April 1998 to four consecu- tive life terms plus 30 years.

Case 3: Ramzi Yousef Involving a high degree of criminalcopy, sophistication, some terrorist attacks are the work of individuals who can be described as masters of their criminal enterprise. The following case illustrates this concept. On February 26, 1993, Ramzi Yousef detonated a bomb in a parking garage beneath Tower One of the World Trade Center in New York City. The bomb was a mobile truck bomb that Yousef and an associate had constructednot in New Jersey from a converted Ford Econoline van. It was of a fairly simple design but extremely powerful. The detonation occurred as follows: The critical moment came at 12:17 and 37 seconds. One of the fuses burnt to its end and ignitedDo the gunpowder in an Atlas Rockmaster blasting cap. In a split second the cap exploded with a pressure of around 15,000 lbs per square inch, igniting in turn the first nitro-glycerin container of the bomb, which erupted with a pressure of about 150,000 lbs per square inch— the equivalent of about 10,000 atmospheres. In turn, the nitro-glycerin ignited cardboard boxes containing a witches’ brew of urea pellets and sulphuric acid.34

According to investigators and other officials, Yousef’s objective was to topple Tower One onto Tower Two “like a pair of dominoes,”35 release a cloud of toxic gas, and thus achieve a very high death toll.

Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. 16 Part I Terrorism: A Conceptual Review

Ramzi Yousef, apparently born in Kuwait and reared in Pakistan, was an activist educated in the United Kingdom. His education was interrupted during the Soviet war in Afghanistan, when he apparently “spent several months in Peshawar [Pakistan] in training camps funded by Osama bin Laden learning bomb-making skills.”36 After the war, Yousef returned to school in the United Kingdom and received a Higher National Diploma in computer-aided electrical engineering. In the summer of 1991, Ramzi Yousef returned to the training camps in Peshawar for additional training in electronics and explosives. He U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation arrived in New York City in September 1992 and shortly thereafter began planning to carry out a significant attack, having selected the World Trade Center as his target. Yousef established contacts with former associates already in the New York area and eventually became close to Muhammed Salameh, who assisted in the construction of the bomb. They purchased chemicals and other bomb-making components, stored them in a rented locker, and assembled the bomb in an apartment in Jersey City. They apparently tested considerably scaled-down versions of the bomb several times. After the attack, Yousef boarded a flight at JFK Airport and flew to Pakistan. This case is a good example of the technical skill and criminal sophistication of some terrorists. Ramzidistribute Yousef had connections with well-funded terrorists, was a sophisticated bomb maker, knew how to Photo 1.5 Ramzi Yousef, master terrorist obtain the necessary components in a foreign country, was very adept and mastermind of the first bombing of the at evasion, and obviously planned his actions in meticulous detail. As a World Trade Center in New York City, in 1993. or postscript, Ramzi Yousef remained very active among bin Laden’s associates, and his travels within the movement took him far afield, including trips to Thailand and the Philippines. In an example of international law enforcement cooperation, he was eventually captured in Pakistan in February 1995 and sent to the United States to stand trial for the bombing. Yousef was tried, convicted, and sentenced to serve at least 240 years in prison in the “supermaximum” federal prison in Florence,post, Colorado.

Chapter Summary copy, As a first consideration, this chapter introduced readers to an that state terrorism and antistate dissident movements have overview of extremism and terrorism, whereby their sources existed since ancient times. and interrelationship were summarized; these subjects are Most, if not all, nations promote an ideological doctrine to explored in detail in subsequentnot chapters. Conceptual con- legitimize the power of the state and to convince the people that siderations include the symbolism and criminality of political their systems of belief are worthy of loyalty, sacrifice, and (when violence as well as the concept of the just war. Whether terrorist necessary) violent defense. Conversely, when a group of people acts are mala in se or mala prohibita is often a relative question. perceives that an alternative ideology or condition should be Depending onDo one’s perspective, there are gray areas that promoted, revolutionary violence may occur against the defend- challenge us to be objective about the true nature of political ers of the established rival order. In neither case would those violence. who commit acts of political violence consider themselves to Some of the historical and modern attributes of terror- be unjustified in their actions, and they certainly would not label ism were also discussed, with a central theme that terrorism is themselves terrorists. deeply rooted in the human experience. The impact of extrem- In Chapter 2, readers will be challenged to probe the nature ist ideas on human behavior should not be underestimated of terrorism more deeply. The discussion will center on the because there are historical examples of political violence that importance of perspective and the question of how to define in some ways parallel modern terrorism. For example, we noted terrorism.

Key Terms and Concepts

The following topics are discussed in this chapter and can be found in the glossary: crucifixion 9 mala prohibita 7 “struggle meetings” 10 extremism 4 regicide 9 symbolism 6 jus ad bellum 8 Reign of Terror (Régime terrorism 4 de la Terreur) 10 jus in bello 8 total war 17 Revolutionary Tribunal 10 just war doctrine 7 tyrannicide 9 10 sicarii 10 komiteh UNABOM 15 mala in se 7 soft targets 4

Prominent Persons and Organizations distribute The following names and organizations are discussed in this chapter and can be found in Appendix B:

Al-Qa’ida 14 Osama bin Ladin 2 or Saint Augustine 8 Anders Breivik 14 People’s Will (Narodnaya Volya) 12 Theodore “Ted” Kaczynski 15 Luddites 11 Ramzi Yousef 15 Zealots 10

Discussion Box post,

Total War The estimated number of civilians killed during the war is staggering:b This chapter’s Discussion Box is intended to stimulate critical debate about the legitimacycopy, of using extreme force Belgium 90,000 against civilian populations. Britain 70,000 Total war is “warfare that uses all possible means of China 20,000,000 attack, military, scientific, and psychological, against both Czechoslovakia 319,000 enemy troops and civilians.”a It was the prevailing military France 391,000 doctrine applied bynot combatant nations during World War II Germany 2,000,000 and was prosecuted by marshalling a total mobilization of Greece 391,000 industrial and human resources. AlliedDo and Axis military planners specifically targeted Japan 953,000 civilian populations. In the cases of German and Japanese Poland 6,000,000 strategists, the war was fought as much against indigenous Soviet Union 7,700,000 populations as against opposing armies. The massacres and Yugoslavia 1,400,000 genocide directed against civilian populations at Auschwitz, Dachau, Warsaw, Lidice, and Nanking—and countless other An important doctrine of the air war on all sides was atrocities—are a dark legacy of the 20th century. widespread bombing of civilian populations in urban (Continued)

Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. 18 Part I Terrorism: A Conceptual Review

(Continued)

areas (so-called saturation bombing), so that the cities of 4. Is there such a thing as justifiable terrorism? Is terror- Rotterdam, Coventry, London, Berlin, Dresden, and Tokyo ism malum in se or malum prohibitum? were deliberately attacked. It is estimated that the American 5. Is the practice of total war by individuals or small atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in and poorly armed groups different from its practice c Japan killed, respectively, 70,000 and 35,000 people. by nations and standing armies? How so or how not? Discussion Questions 1. Are deliberate attacks against civilians legitimate acts Notes of war? a. Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary of the English 2. Were deliberate attacks on civilians during World War Language, Unabridged, 2nd ed. New York: Publishers Guild, 1966. II acts of terrorism? b. Mercer, Derrik, ed. Chronicle of the Second World War. Essex, UK: Longman Group, 1990, p. 668. 3. If these attacks were acts of terrorism, were some c. Jablonski, Edward. Flying Fortress. New York: Doubleday, attacks justifiable acts of terrorism? 1965, p. 285.

On Your Own distribute

The open-access Student Study Site at edge.sagepub websites, exercises,or and recommended readings listed below .com/martin6e has a variety of useful study aids, including are easily accessed on this site as well. eFlashcards, quizzes, audio resources, and journal articles. The